Technology and Operations  
This forum is for discussing technological & operational matters pertaining to U-boats. 
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats
Posted by: J.T. McDaniel ()
Date: December 03, 2005 04:53PM

Our commanders certainly thought the Japanese had functional detectors, judging from the number of comments in patrol reports about planes showing up as soon as they started running the SD radar. SD was useful, but most COs preferred to key the transmitter intermittently, rather than run it all the time, being convinced the enemy was using it as a homing beacon.

The Japanese also fielded surface ship and airborne radar as the war progressed, but never managed to same effectivness as the Allied types. They had a lot of good engineers, but, like the Germans, never developed a cavity magnetron, which limited radar effectiveness. Our own radar detection reports indicate Japanese radar operated mostly in the 96-350 MHz range.

Guppy, by the way, is a modification series, not a class. The sub in Philadelphia, BECUNA, is a BALAO class boat with Guppy IA modifications. The only real difference between a GATO and a BALAO was the thickness and type of steel in the pressure hull, which allowed the BALAOs to dive an extra 100 feet, and the conning tower fairwater design, which was minimal in the BALAOs. The TENCH class boats, only a few of which saw active service during the war, were also an incremental advance, with most of the differences being found in the machinery (2 variable speed motors in a TENCH vs. 4 high-speed motors and reduction gears in a GATO/BALAO).

J.T. McDaniel

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Written By Posted
US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats Robert Murphy 12/03/2005 09:18AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats J.T. McDaniel 12/03/2005 04:53PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats Robert Murphy 12/04/2005 03:52AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats danodenweller 12/04/2005 04:29AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats Robert Murphy 12/05/2005 06:21PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats kurt 12/05/2005 06:21PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats Mike Mamula 12/05/2005 06:49PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats kurt 12/05/2005 07:44PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats Forest 12/10/2005 03:02AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats Harold Moyers 12/05/2005 10:37PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats Forest 12/09/2005 04:55AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs Robert Murphy 12/09/2005 10:00PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs Forest 12/10/2005 03:00AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs ROBERT M. 12/10/2005 06:27AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs Forest 12/12/2005 03:20AM
"Standard Displacement?" Robert Murphy 12/12/2005 08:37AM
Re: "Standard Displacement?" kurt 12/12/2005 11:49PM
Re: "Standard Displacement?" Forest 12/13/2005 02:14AM
Re: "Standard Displacement?" Robert Murphy 12/13/2005 04:52AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs ROBERT M. 12/12/2005 05:25PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs Robert Murphy 12/12/2005 10:35PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs Forest 12/13/2005 02:43AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs ROBERT M. 12/13/2005 03:52PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs kurt 12/13/2005 07:45PM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs Forest 12/13/2005 09:32PM
shinano stories kurt 12/13/2005 11:49PM
Re: shinano stories Forest 12/14/2005 01:21AM
Re: shinano stories ROBERT M. 12/14/2005 04:24AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs ROBERT M. 12/10/2005 06:08AM
Re: US Submarines vis-a-vis U-Boats--Tonnage Sunk by US Subs Robert Murphy 12/11/2005 01:49AM
US subs tonnage sunk kurt 12/13/2005 07:58PM
Re: US subs tonnage sunk Robert Murphy 12/14/2005 07:08PM


Your Name: 
Your Email: 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **              **   ******    ********   ******  
 **              **  **    **      **     **    ** 
 **              **  **            **     **       
 **              **  **   ****     **     **       
 **        **    **  **    **      **     **       
 **        **    **  **    **      **     **    ** 
 ********   ******    ******       **      ******